Is there any case law where a defendant who claims to have been unconscious for a period of time was able to drive a car in the middle of the road after the accident?

Nor is People v. Carlson (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 695, on which the Attorney General also relies, on point. There, defendant drove a complicated route and then, after a deadly accident, was able to climb out of the car through the sunroof and interact with numerous witnesses, answering questions and "repeatedly insist[ing] she was not driving the car when the accident occurred." (Id. at p. 704.) Although the Attorney General points to defendant's questionable conduct in moving the body the next day, defendant's actions came hours after the period during which he professed to be unconscious. Although, as we will explain, defendant's conduct later that morning is relevant to our analysis of harmlessness that follows, it is not relevant to the question of whether defendant's actions while claiming unconsciousness operated to deny him the instruction.